Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

Hi Guys,
I'm looking over the files at;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedallasfiles/
These antennas are mostly for the AMBC band.
The author doesn't allow discussion on the site,
I wonder if anyone else has viewed these files and
has interest in the antennas and wants a discussion group.
Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:42:16 -0500, amdx wrote:

Hi Guys,
I'm looking over the files at;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedallasfiles/
These antennas are mostly for the AMBC band.
The author doesn't allow discussion on the site,
I wonder if anyone else has viewed these files and
has interest in the antennas and wants a discussion group.
Mikek

Hi Mike,

Not much to recommend it.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/13/2011 7:35 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:42:16 -0500, wrote:

Hi Guys,
I'm looking over the files at;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedallasfiles/
These antennas are mostly for the AMBC band.
The author doesn't allow discussion on the site,
I wonder if anyone else has viewed these files and
has interest in the antennas and wants a discussion group.
Mikek

Hi Mike,

Not much to recommend it.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Do you mean you don't have an interest in the subject
or do you mean you have a better antenna for the
AMBC band?
If you have a better antenna, let me know, I'm ready to start
building. Ideally I want to rotate a flashlight beam...
but I'll settle for rotating a wide aperture null.

Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:09:02 -0500, amdx wrote:

Do you mean you don't have an interest in the subject
or do you mean you have a better antenna for the
AMBC band?
If you have a better antenna, let me know, I'm ready to start
building. Ideally I want to rotate a flashlight beam...
but I'll settle for rotating a wide aperture null.

Mikek

Hi Mike,

The subject is Dallas Files, right?

What does that mean?

I've no interest in playing games with the author who refuses to
engage in dialog simply to access files of unknown content. Apparently
given the dearth of participation, neither does anyone else. With the
absence of discussion at the author's site, there is no interest there
either.

Now, if you care to describe what you have come to learn, that is
another matter. I presume by implication alone that this is about
small, beam stearable, receive-only antennas. Unfortunately, there's
a lot left unsaid.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/14/2011 6:59 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:09:02 -0500, wrote:

Do you mean you don't have an interest in the subject
or do you mean you have a better antenna for the
AMBC band?
If you have a better antenna, let me know, I'm ready to start
building. Ideally I want to rotate a flashlight beam...
but I'll settle for rotating a wide aperture null.

Mikek

Hi Mike,

The subject is Dallas Files, right?

What does that mean?

I've no interest in playing games with the author who refuses to
engage in dialog simply to access files of unknown content. Apparently
given the dearth of participation, neither does anyone else. With the
absence of discussion at the author's site, there is no interest there
either.

Now, if you care to describe what you have come to learn, that is
another matter. I presume by implication alone that this is about
small, beam stearable, receive-only antennas. Unfortunately, there's
a lot left unsaid.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
Hi Richard,
Ya, the author has no interest in engaging, he just posts what he has
learned. The site was recently moved to Yahoo and is only about 2 months
old. As for the absence of discussion on the site, it's not allowed, so
that is hardly an indicator.
Yes, I'm looking a steerable receive only arrays for the AM broadcast
band. Myself, I want one that will fit on a 150ft lot.
Sounds like you didn't look at the site so "what is left unsaid."

Thanks, Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/14/2011 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:
On 7/14/2011 6:59 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:09:02 -0500, wrote:

Do you mean you don't have an interest in the subject
or do you mean you have a better antenna for the
AMBC band?
If you have a better antenna, let me know, I'm ready to start
building. Ideally I want to rotate a flashlight beam...
but I'll settle for rotating a wide aperture null.

Mikek

Hi Mike,

The subject is Dallas Files, right?

What does that mean?

I've no interest in playing games with the author who refuses to
engage in dialog simply to access files of unknown content. Apparently
given the dearth of participation, neither does anyone else. With the
absence of discussion at the author's site, there is no interest there
either.

Now, if you care to describe what you have come to learn, that is
another matter. I presume by implication alone that this is about
small, beam stearable, receive-only antennas. Unfortunately, there's
a lot left unsaid.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
Hi Richard,
Ya, the author has no interest in engaging, he just posts what he has
learned. The site was recently moved to Yahoo and is only about 2 months
old. As for the absence of discussion on the site, it's not allowed, so
that is hardly an indicator.
Yes, I'm looking a steerable receive only arrays for the AM broadcast
band. Myself, I want one that will fit on a 150ft lot.
Sounds like you didn't look at the site so "what is left unsaid."

Thanks, Mikek


I don't know what you found there, Mikek, but I have see nothing
concerning antennas.

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/14/2011 7:34 PM, John S wrote:
On 7/14/2011 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:
On 7/14/2011 6:59 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:09:02 -0500, wrote:

Do you mean you don't have an interest in the subject
or do you mean you have a better antenna for the
AMBC band?
If you have a better antenna, let me know, I'm ready to start
building. Ideally I want to rotate a flashlight beam...
but I'll settle for rotating a wide aperture null.

Mikek

Hi Mike,

The subject is Dallas Files, right?

What does that mean?

I've no interest in playing games with the author who refuses to
engage in dialog simply to access files of unknown content. Apparently
given the dearth of participation, neither does anyone else. With the
absence of discussion at the author's site, there is no interest there
either.

Now, if you care to describe what you have come to learn, that is
another matter. I presume by implication alone that this is about
small, beam stearable, receive-only antennas. Unfortunately, there's
a lot left unsaid.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
Hi Richard,
Ya, the author has no interest in engaging, he just posts what he has
learned. The site was recently moved to Yahoo and is only about 2 months
old. As for the absence of discussion on the site, it's not allowed, so
that is hardly an indicator.
Yes, I'm looking a steerable receive only arrays for the AM broadcast
band. Myself, I want one that will fit on a 150ft lot.
Sounds like you didn't look at the site so "what is left unsaid."

Thanks, Mikek


I don't know what you found there, Mikek, but I have see nothing
concerning antennas.


I think you need to join, to see the 14 antenna files (pdfs)
Some of the other files are Small Signal amplifiers, Receivers
and Theory.
Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:31:17 -0500, amdx wrote:

Sounds like you didn't look at the site so "what is left unsaid."

Hi Mike,

As I said, nothing there but a vague suggestion of the topic heavily
cloaked in an admonition.

Yes, I'm looking a steerable receive only arrays for the AM broadcast
band. Myself, I want one that will fit on a 150ft lot.

Is that 150' on a side? 150' long?

There are any number of ways to construct variable delay lines. A
little bit of computer control will pull their outputs together to
form beam steering.

Planting the antennas is simple and allows for testing of any of those
many ways to construct variable delay lines. Those designs themselves
have various trade-offs for issues you need to prioritize and
pronounce. The antennas don't need to be in any particular, regular
pattern as that would be accommodated by computer alignment.

If you choose to go manual steering, with analog variable delay line
designs; then, yes, having a regular pattern of element layout would
reduce complexity.

How many antenna elements? At least three, I would suspect. From
there on it is a matter of how well you can resolve the various delay
angles for steering a broad beam angle. Increase the number of
elements and the beam angle gets progressively tighter. You don't say
how much directionality you want, but it will be intimately correlated
with this count.

The delay lines will have to be tolerant of mutual coupling - better
yet, they should not perturb the existing mutual coupling at all. Good
isolation amplifiers between each element and its delay line before
going to a summing amplifier would seem a solution. Tracking between
delay lines will affect beam width. More elements will require
tighter tracking.

Then there is something simpler, an Adcock Antenna and the Bellini
Tosi Antenna (about 100 years old, but does the job too). There is
the Krug (Wullenweber) antenna. They are all symmetrical designs that
simplified the manual, analog delay lines design.

In the end, they all comprise the same fundamentals. If you cannot
support a symmetrical design, that is your primary limiting factor. If
you can digitize the delay lines, then symmetry can be synthesized and
the antennas can be placed physically anywhere limited only by the
resolution of digital sampling rate.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/15/2011 1:20 AM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:31:17 -0500, wrote:

Sounds like you didn't look at the site so "what is left unsaid."

Hi Mike,

As I said, nothing there but a vague suggestion of the topic heavily
cloaked in an admonition.

You cast dispersions, but haven't looked at any of the antenna
systems. Look at just one and see if you any thoughts.
Look at "Hi Z PPL Loop And Flag Arrays.pdf" it's the 5th file down
on the antennas page.

Yes, I'm looking a steerable receive only arrays for the AM broadcast
band. Myself, I want one that will fit on a 150ft lot.

Is that 150' on a side? 150' long?

There are any number of ways to construct variable delay lines. A
little bit of computer control will pull their outputs together to
form beam steering.

Are you aware that steering the null is very important for AM
band dxing?

Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 17:32:20 -0700, "Sal" wrote:

am I special? ;-)

Yes, as your name is now among the select in the scrolls of the
"Dallas Files."

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

"Sal" wrote in message ...

A quick followup and then no more.

The owner of the group takes a distinct approach to determining whom he
admits. Out of respect for maintainiing its integrity, I will say no more.

He evidently doesn't "have it in" for anybody by group, profession, etc..

"Sal"

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 17:32:20 -0700, "Sal" wrote:

am I special? ;-)

Yes, as your name is now among the select in the scrolls of the
"Dallas Files."

That's funny, but note the next post, "a quick followup," which I wrote and
sent during the lag time before yours appeared.

Special, ordinary ... whatever I am; apparently I can join, after all.

"Sal"

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/16/2011 11:47 PM, Sal wrote:
wrote in message ...

A quick followup and then no more.

The owner of the group takes a distinct approach to determining whom he
admits. Out of respect for maintainiing its integrity, I will say no more.

He evidently doesn't "have it in" for anybody by group, profession, etc..

"Sal"



This all seems odd to me.
I had no problem getting admitted, he works with several hams regarding
his antenna systems, so it's not about hams.
I think he has some great research using single, dual and quad phased
Flag or Delta antennas. There's also info on building a circuit for
adjustable phasing of two antennas.
So get another email address and just say you have an interest in
improving your AM radio reception.

Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

"amdx" wrote in message
...


snip

This all seems odd to me.
I had no problem getting admitted, he works with several hams regarding
his antenna systems, so it's not about hams.
I think he has some great research using single, dual and quad phased
Flag or Delta antennas. There's also info on building a circuit for
adjustable phasing of two antennas.
So get another email address and just say you have an interest in
improving your AM radio reception.

Mikek

But, yet, I got turned down again, even though I fully complied with his
directions. The problem is that I politely added my opinion that his
methodology for rejecting his group's applicants had a flaw in my case. (He
had earlier explained some of it to me in a thoughtful and candid private
email.) Obviously, I should have kept my opinion to myself. I live and
learn.

He responded to me with a curt one-line private email saying that the flaw
was in _my logic_. From that, coupled with his third rejection two minutes
later, I conclude that the mere mention of anything negative is an instant
deal-breaker. He had earlier described trouble he'd had in his group with
people he termed "bad boys." It's much easier to be dubbed one of his "bad
boys" than I would have guessed. Wow!

Yes, I could try to trick him with another email address; however, since I'm
not welcome at his front door, why risk the humiliation if he catches me
prying open a back window? I'm already somewhat annoyed at myself for this
missed opportunity. Why make it worse?

OK, so the final score is Dallas 3, Me 0. Game over. *sigh*

"Sal"

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/17/2011 3:49 PM, Sal wrote:
wrote in message
...


snip

This all seems odd to me.
I had no problem getting admitted, he works with several hams regarding
his antenna systems, so it's not about hams.
I think he has some great research using single, dual and quad phased
Flag or Delta antennas. There's also info on building a circuit for
adjustable phasing of two antennas.
So get another email address and just say you have an interest in
improving your AM radio reception.

Mikek

But, yet, I got turned down again, even though I fully complied with his
directions. The problem is that I politely added my opinion that his
methodology for rejecting his group's applicants had a flaw in my case. (He
had earlier explained some of it to me in a thoughtful and candid private
email.) Obviously, I should have kept my opinion to myself. I live and
learn.

He responded to me with a curt one-line private email saying that the flaw
was in _my logic_. From that, coupled with his third rejection two minutes
later, I conclude that the mere mention of anything negative is an instant
deal-breaker. He had earlier described trouble he'd had in his group with
people he termed "bad boys." It's much easier to be dubbed one of his "bad
boys" than I would have guessed. Wow!

Yes, I could try to trick him with another email address; however, since I'm
not welcome at his front door, why risk the humiliation if he catches me
prying open a back window? I'm already somewhat annoyed at myself for this
missed opportunity. Why make it worse?

OK, so the final score is Dallas 3, Me 0. Game over. *sigh*

"Sal"

Thanks for the info, Sal. I had entertained the thought of signing up.
Apparently, it's not worth it.

John - KD5YI

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/17/2011 5:01 PM, John S wrote:
On 7/17/2011 3:49 PM, Sal wrote:
wrote in message
...


snip

This all seems odd to me.
I had no problem getting admitted, he works with several hams regarding
his antenna systems, so it's not about hams.
I think he has some great research using single, dual and quad phased
Flag or Delta antennas. There's also info on building a circuit for
adjustable phasing of two antennas.
So get another email address and just say you have an interest in
improving your AM radio reception.

Mikek

But, yet, I got turned down again, even though I fully complied with his
directions. The problem is that I politely added my opinion that his
methodology for rejecting his group's applicants had a flaw in my
case. (He
had earlier explained some of it to me in a thoughtful and candid private
email.) Obviously, I should have kept my opinion to myself. I live and
learn.

He responded to me with a curt one-line private email saying that the
flaw
was in _my logic_. From that, coupled with his third rejection two
minutes
later, I conclude that the mere mention of anything negative is an
instant
deal-breaker. He had earlier described trouble he'd had in his group with
people he termed "bad boys." It's much easier to be dubbed one of his
"bad
boys" than I would have guessed. Wow!

Yes, I could try to trick him with another email address; however,
since I'm
not welcome at his front door, why risk the humiliation if he catches me
prying open a back window? I'm already somewhat annoyed at myself for
this
missed opportunity. Why make it worse?

OK, so the final score is Dallas 3, Me 0. Game over. *sigh*

"Sal"

Thanks for the info, Sal. I had entertained the thought of signing up.
Apparently, it's not worth it.

John - KD5YI

Well it is worth it, if you have an interest in broadcast band phased
receiving antennas. Once your in, you can download the pdf files or just
look them over to your hearts content.
I was just hoping for someone else to talk nulling antennas with.
oh well,
John if you send me a private email, I'll send a sample or two
of what's on the site.
Thanks, Mikek

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/17/2011 5:27 PM, amdx wrote:
On 7/17/2011 5:01 PM, John S wrote:
On 7/17/2011 3:49 PM, Sal wrote:
wrote in message
...


snip

This all seems odd to me.
I had no problem getting admitted, he works with several hams regarding
his antenna systems, so it's not about hams.
I think he has some great research using single, dual and quad phased
Flag or Delta antennas. There's also info on building a circuit for
adjustable phasing of two antennas.
So get another email address and just say you have an interest in
improving your AM radio reception.

Mikek

But, yet, I got turned down again, even though I fully complied with his
directions. The problem is that I politely added my opinion that his
methodology for rejecting his group's applicants had a flaw in my
case. (He
had earlier explained some of it to me in a thoughtful and candid
private
email.) Obviously, I should have kept my opinion to myself. I live and
learn.

He responded to me with a curt one-line private email saying that the
flaw
was in _my logic_. From that, coupled with his third rejection two
minutes
later, I conclude that the mere mention of anything negative is an
instant
deal-breaker. He had earlier described trouble he'd had in his group
with
people he termed "bad boys." It's much easier to be dubbed one of his
"bad
boys" than I would have guessed. Wow!

Yes, I could try to trick him with another email address; however,
since I'm
not welcome at his front door, why risk the humiliation if he catches me
prying open a back window? I'm already somewhat annoyed at myself for
this
missed opportunity. Why make it worse?

OK, so the final score is Dallas 3, Me 0. Game over. *sigh*

"Sal"

Thanks for the info, Sal. I had entertained the thought of signing up.
Apparently, it's not worth it.

John - KD5YI

Well it is worth it, if you have an interest in broadcast band phased
receiving antennas. Once your in, you can download the pdf files or just
look them over to your hearts content.
I was just hoping for someone else to talk nulling antennas with.
oh well,
John if you send me a private email, I'll send a sample or two
of what's on the site.
Thanks, Mikek


I appreciate the offer, MikeK, but I'm not interested in material where
the keeper is so hard-nosed.

Thanks anyway.

John - KD5YI

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

"John S" wrote in message
...

Thanks for the info, Sal. I had entertained the thought of signing up.
Apparently, it's not worth it.

John - KD5YI

I wouldn't say that. I don't know! Give it a try.

Academically, he certainly has credentials. I easily discovered article
references showing he holds a PhD in Mathematics. He's a current university
professor and a widely regarded antenna expert.

I think he just doesn't tolerate people who cross him. I can't, in good
conscience, condemn him outright for that. Maybe he's just over his
lifetime toleration for the behavior of smart-ass 18-year-olds (and anybody
else that doesn't fly right).

Sal

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 16:19:33 -0700, "Sal" wrote:


"John S" wrote in message
...

Thanks for the info, Sal. I had entertained the thought of signing up.
Apparently, it's not worth it.

John - KD5YI

I wouldn't say that. I don't know! Give it a try.

Academically, he certainly has credentials. I easily discovered article
references showing he holds a PhD in Mathematics. He's a current university
professor and a widely regarded antenna expert.

I think he just doesn't tolerate people who cross him. I can't, in good
conscience, condemn him outright for that. Maybe he's just over his
lifetime toleration for the behavior of smart-ass 18-year-olds (and anybody
else that doesn't fly right).

Sal

It is more of a BLOG than a Forum. I have not found anything that
especially interests me yet. That does not keep me from checking in
from time to time.

I doubt there are few of us that don't seem a bit weird to some
people. My guess is that he wants to share his work without having to
give up time to those who just contribute to the noise level.

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

"W8CCW" wrote in message
...

I doubt there are few of us that don't seem a bit weird to some
people. My guess is that he wants to share his work without having to
give up time to those who just contribute to the noise level.


Well said.

"Sal"
(KD6VKW)

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On 7/14/2011 11:20 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:31:17 -0500, wrote:

Sounds like you didn't look at the site so "what is left unsaid."

Hi Mike,

As I said, nothing there but a vague suggestion of the topic heavily
cloaked in an admonition.

Yes, I'm looking a steerable receive only arrays for the AM broadcast
band. Myself, I want one that will fit on a 150ft lot.

Is that 150' on a side? 150' long?

There are any number of ways to construct variable delay lines. A
little bit of computer control will pull their outputs together to
form beam steering.


For receive only, and moderate bandwidth, then digitizing the multiple
antennas and doing the phasing in software is probably the easiest
approach. Essentially infinite variability, you get "true time delay"
as opposed to phasing (the latter is inherently narrower band, although
for AM BC band, it might not make any difference.. 150 ft is a tiny
fraction of a wavelength).




Planting the antennas is simple and allows for testing of any of those
many ways to construct variable delay lines. Those designs themselves
have various trade-offs for issues you need to prioritize and
pronounce. The antennas don't need to be in any particular, regular
pattern as that would be accommodated by computer alignment.

If you choose to go manual steering, with analog variable delay line
designs; then, yes, having a regular pattern of element layout would
reduce complexity.

How many antenna elements? At least three, I would suspect. From
there on it is a matter of how well you can resolve the various delay
angles for steering a broad beam angle. Increase the number of
elements and the beam angle gets progressively tighter. You don't say
how much directionality you want, but it will be intimately correlated
with this count.

In general, you can place N-1 nulls with an array of N antennas. Broad
nulls (in angular extent) are done by stacking multiple narrow nulls.
For AM BC band (which is like 160m ham band), gain isn't a big deal,
you'll be interference and atmospheric noise limited.



The delay lines will have to be tolerant of mutual coupling - better
yet, they should not perturb the existing mutual coupling at all. Good
isolation amplifiers between each element and its delay line before
going to a summing amplifier would seem a solution. Tracking between
delay lines will affect beam width. More elements will require
tighter tracking.


The usual scheme is to use a lossy short untuned antenna and a FET
pre-amp. There are several nice designs out there, or you can buy them
off the shelf.
http://www.amrad.org/projects/lf/actant/ is an example

In the end, they all comprise the same fundamentals. If you cannot
support a symmetrical design, that is your primary limiting factor. If
you can digitize the delay lines, then symmetry can be synthesized and
the antennas can be placed physically anywhere limited only by the
resolution of digital sampling rate.

And the dynamic range of the amplifier/digitizer.





73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 13:49:46 -0700, "Sal" wrote:


"amdx" wrote in message
. ..


snip

This all seems odd to me.
I had no problem getting admitted, he works with several hams regarding
his antenna systems, so it's not about hams.
I think he has some great research using single, dual and quad phased
Flag or Delta antennas. There's also info on building a circuit for
adjustable phasing of two antennas.
So get another email address and just say you have an interest in
improving your AM radio reception.

Mikek

But, yet, I got turned down again, even though I fully complied with his
directions. The problem is that I politely added my opinion that his
methodology for rejecting his group's applicants had a flaw in my case. (He
had earlier explained some of it to me in a thoughtful and candid private
email.) Obviously, I should have kept my opinion to myself. I live and
learn.

He responded to me with a curt one-line private email saying that the flaw
was in _my logic_. From that, coupled with his third rejection two minutes
later, I conclude that the mere mention of anything negative is an instant
deal-breaker. He had earlier described trouble he'd had in his group with
people he termed "bad boys." It's much easier to be dubbed one of his "bad
boys" than I would have guessed. Wow!

Yes, I could try to trick him with another email address; however, since I'm
not welcome at his front door, why risk the humiliation if he catches me
prying open a back window? I'm already somewhat annoyed at myself for this
missed opportunity. Why make it worse?

OK, so the final score is Dallas 3, Me 0. Game over. *sigh*


Ya shoulda just kept your mouth shut rather than call him out on his "flaw"
telling him you you don't respect him and just have to have the last word.
His not allowing members posts should have given you a clue he is ultra
anal. The outcome was predictable. Ya shoulda kept your mouth shut.

Oh yeah, I got in too.

Anybody following the Dallas Files
 

"Restek" wrote in message
...


snip

Ya shoulda just kept your mouth shut rather than call him out on his
"flaw"
telling him you you don't respect him and just have to have the last word.
His not allowing members posts should have given you a clue he is ultra
anal. The outcome was predictable. Ya shoulda kept your mouth shut.

Oh yeah, I got in too.

Noted.

"Sal"